Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or f-ing beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.- Al Swearengen

That blows nothing open. Regardless of whether I think Lerner did something wrong, NONE of the text attributed to her calls out conservative groups. The article loosely mentions some conservative groups names raised by another individual, but out of context so its meaningless.

Nothing will blow it open because the left does not care that she lied. Look at Bengazi. Everybody knows Obama lied and the entire administration lied.

Ask Dude or Jim if they care about Obama saying "if you like your insurance, you can keep it period."

Look at Clinton, he lied under oath repeatedly, he went on TV to purposefully try to decieve the American people about the entire thing, but it was OK to try and win a law suit by lying under oath.

OK, they won't say any of it is OK, they will give BS excuses about how they don't like that these people lie, blah, blah, blah, but they should stay in power and we should give them more because everybody knows you can trust a liberal liar.

Thirty-seven percent think Obama lies “most of the time,” while another 24 percent say he lies “some of the time.” Twenty percent of voters say “only now and then” and 15 percent “never.”

Yet some of those groups are also among those most likely to say Obama “never” lies to the country on important matters: blacks (37 percent), Democrats (31 percent), liberals (28 percent) and women (19 percent).

Nearly one out of three Democrats are so clueless that they say Obama NEVER lies

The people on the left do not hold their politicians to any standard of honesty or ethics, so there could be video of Obama ordering Lerner to do as much as possible to squash the Tea Party so he can win reelection and they would not care so there is no way to blow anything wide open no matter what the truth is.

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.

That blows nothing open. Regardless of whether I think Lerner did something wrong, NONE of the text attributed to her calls out conservative groups. The article loosely mentions some conservative groups names raised by another individual, but out of context so its meaningless.

It shows there was collusion going on, between the IRS and the Department of Justice targeting Tea Party groups. Lois Lerner desired to have them criminally incorporated. It also shows that Eric Holder and Lois Lerner not only are liars, they're in cahoots.

Lois Lerner was in contact with the Department of Justice in May 2013 about whether tax exempt groups could be criminally prosecuted for 'lying' about political activity." She was asking the DOJ to prosecute people like Catherine Engelbrecht.

Lerner's in charge of tax-exempt status applications, and here comes the Tea Party, and we all know what happened, none of them were granted tax-exempt status. They were denied their constitutional rights to political free speech, and furthermore now we learn that she was sending e-mails up to DOJ asking that they be criminally prosecuted.

These new emails show that the day before the news broke of the IRS scandal, Lois Lerner was talking to a top Obama Justice Department official about whether the DOJ could prosecute the very same organizations that the IRS had already improperly targeted. Remember the "rogue IRS agents in Cincinnati" story? The IRS emails show Eric Holder’s Department of Justice is now implicated and conflicted in the IRS scandal. No wonder 'Judicial Watch' had to sue in federal court to get these documents. It's from the Freedom of Information Act requests.

Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or f-ing beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.- Al Swearengen

That blows nothing open. Regardless of whether I think Lerner did something wrong, NONE of the text attributed to her calls out conservative groups. The article loosely mentions some conservative groups names raised by another individual, but out of context so its meaningless.

It shows there was collusion going on, between the IRS and the Department of Justice targeting Tea Party groups. Lois Lerner desired to have them criminally incorporated. It also shows that Eric Holder and Lois Lerner not only are liars, they're in cahoots.

No it doesn't. The emails from her NEVER mentioned Tea Party or conservative groups. Based on the text of the emails in the article she could have been going after lib organizations too. Do I highly suspect there was wrong doing? Yes. Am I so blinded by partisanship that I think that article proves it? No

That blows nothing open. Regardless of whether I think Lerner did something wrong, NONE of the text attributed to her calls out conservative groups. The article loosely mentions some conservative groups names raised by another individual, but out of context so its meaningless.

It shows there was collusion going on, between the IRS and the Department of Justice targeting Tea Party groups. Lois Lerner desired to have them criminally incorporated. It also shows that Eric Holder and Lois Lerner not only are liars, they're in cahoots.

No it doesn't. The emails from her NEVER mentioned Tea Party or conservative groups. Based on the text of the emails in the article she could have been going after lib organizations too. Do I highly suspect there was wrong doing? Yes. Am I so blinded by partisanship that I think that article proves it? No

I generally agree with you here.

First I think it was blown open long ago that people in the IRS in general and Lerner specifically are actively engaged in a cover up.

So far they have been successful at covering up a lot of what they were doing. Since they have been successful at least in part of covering up their actions, we don't know what they are in full. The IRS covering up their actions should have been wildly more than sufficient to blow the roof off of this. If there is an organization in the government that should be more open and transparent, I cannot think of one. There is no conceivable excuse for the people working for the Internal Revenue Service to get anything but the most comprehensive scrutiny and have in place the greatest controls to make sure that Congress can oversee every last detail of what every employee at the IRS is doing. That should be business as usual. The fact that it is not should scare the hell out of everybody. There is where the NSA should be spying on every thing they do in their official capacity.

Where I disagree a bit is that if they were targeting liberal groups. We would all know because it would have been exculpatory. It is not DNA on the blue dress proof and therefore doesn't blow it wide open as nitram says, but it is another piece of circumstantial evidence. I think a fairly strong piece, but when dealing with the government stupid often looks like conspiracy. In this case, I have serious doubts. But there is no excuse for us not knowing every detail at this point. This is the IRS. They should not be able to cover up and stonewall Congress regardless of which party is in the White House and which party chairs the oversight committees.

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.

I apologize Beretta, I had a few things happen today while I simultaneously tried to respond to your post(s). You are correct in stating there is no specific mention of conservative groups in the cited article. Considering the plethora of deception surrounding this subject, I thought it was implied. As Spin wrote, it's all circumstantial and as a retired LEO, I should've explained it better rather than assuming most would read between the lines. Although many would rather look the other way in hopes this would just 'go-away', it's not over. This is the proverbial tip of the iceberg...

The Department of Justice with which Lerner colluded is the same Department that recently claimed it has no “conflict of interest” in investigating the IRS for such targeting. Last month, Attorney General Eric Holder's department wrote in a letter to Sen. Ted Cruz that DOJ sees no need to appoint a Special Counsel as the “investigation has been and will continue to be conducted by career prosecutors and law enforcement officials in accordance with all Department policies and procedures that are designed to ensure the integrity of an ongoing criminal investigation.” That's what the letter says – any emails to the contrary have not yet been made public.

The letter would be much more convincing, however, had Holder's Justice Department not barred its top investigator in the IRS case (who, incidentally, was an Obama campaign contributor) from testifying before a House hearing into the illegal targeting, claiming that her appearance before the House committee could impinge the investigation.

Good thing Obama made it all clear for the American people when he assured us that there is “not even a smidgen of corruption” in the IRS. Indeed, not one smidgen.

Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair or f-ing beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.- Al Swearengen